When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
correction typo its the 1995 BadBoy
I just rebuilt it as it was looking tired after so many years of British and Irish weather. Engine I have not touched since about 2001. But stripped frame etc down to last nut and bolt. Powder coated and cleaned everything and resprayed
How do we submit videos?
Last edited by ChickinOnaChain; Aug 15, 2015 at 05:30 PM.
Thanks for the reply 98hotrodfatboy My googling seems to indicate it might be possible to get as much as 1.4 ft/lbs per cubic inch. What is the best you have managed and how did you get it?
For my 80" evo that would translate into torque of 112. Currently I am on 85ft/lbs torque and its very swet but 100 would be really nice. I reckon next winter I might start looking at how to do this. Any ideas? is it possible on an 80" evo? I don't want to sacrifice reliability?
85 lb of torque is pretty respectable for an 80" evo, any time you can get more hp and tq than cubic inch you did alright. Don't know what you have in your motor but it really begins with the heads. There is a guy on here that actually hit over 110 lbs in torque with a build of .020 over on the stock bore but he has his own shop and can do what he needs to the heads and everything else. Any ways I have hit actual 96.5 on torque and 96.8 in Hp with hillside stage II heads (I rounded to 97 n 97). 1.90 intake and 1.63 exhaust with a conservative 84 cci combustion chamber ported and polished and worked ports (no compression releases). 1.800" S&S intake with an S&S big E carb with thunder jet. .030 over on Wiseco 11:1 pistons corrected to 10.8:1 static. Stock stroke. Dyna 2000i ignition. Woods W-8 with BeeHive .600 springs and a RB Racing 2-1. this build is a high rpm build 3200 to 6500. for my drive train I eliminated the stock hd chain n gears and went with a BDL enclosed belt drive (dramatically reduced the weight on the crank, quicker ramps) installed a Ultima 6 speed and upgraded the rear pulley from a 65 to 70 tooth. My over all gear ratio is a 3.31:1 in 5th and a 2.84:1 in 6th which gives me approximately 2600 rpm at 70 with unbelievable ramps in 1st, 2nd, 3rd and forth. By the time I grab 4th i'm already over 100 mph. I always liked a small block. sure cubic inch is the way to go but I like to bring amazing power from small packages, I guess it says a lot especially when all you can see is my tail lights...LOL....
What happened to your cam chest cover and I like your ride.
Last edited by 98hotrodfatboy; Dec 18, 2014 at 06:34 PM.
Thanks 98hotrodfatboy Sounds like you have done pretty much all you can do to your engine. I calc that as being 1.1488 ft/lbs per cubic inch for your build. You said 84" and 96.5 ft/lbs. That seems pretty much on what I calculate looking at the after market engines and all naturally aspirated engines. I reckon it may be possible to go as high as 1.3 per ci but I suppose that is the drag racers. So how is it that some of the guys here are claiming ratios way above that? BS or badly configured dynos? What do you reckon is the best ratio achievable>
Here is a more recent pic of my bike taken yesterday with new Harrison Billet 4 piston brake callipers front and back. Harley brakes dotn work as you know.
Thank you. There are a couple of more things I am looking at to get it over 100. On the woods cams website they have dyno postings for different cams and cubic inch motors that have surpassed 100,s and I know of a guy on the forum who's numbers have surpassed anything I have seen. He goes by the name of D_gyver has some impressive rides. just one thing my motor is 83.09 inches. which equates to 1.161 #tq to cu in. where have you seen others claiming more for an 83"er.....?? 1.3 is achievable for street, how much you want to go $$$... I like your brakes and will be needing to upgrade soon. When I pop 130 plus I loose my rears brakes, it's like they don't exist. I think it's because the rear rotor is warped a little creating too much friction at that speed. I will be going to a floater to match the front which should take care of that and maybe new calipers...any reasonable suggestions?
Last edited by 98hotrodfatboy; Dec 19, 2014 at 07:05 PM.
Thanks 98hotrodfatboy I have only recently joined the forum but when I did I saw a number of postings of tq figures north of 140ft/lbs which seemed way out of line with anything I would expect.
Thanks for the link to woods cams his charts are really impressive and I see he is getting 1.3 per CI which is what I would have thought is top of the range. I am definitely going to be saving up to get hold of his parts. Unfortunately I am in the UK just outside London so I would need to find someone here who can do the engine work and am not sure if there is anyone who could do the milling that he has done. But his parts are obviously the way to go. I just spent Ł1400- on breaks, dyno tuning and fuel line so that will have to wait a while. I reckon after this next summer I will be fitting Woods to my bike. There is a chap here at http://www.powerglides.co.uk/ who seems to be the main man in terms of engineering. But I have no personal experience of his work etc. But I will be shopping around over the summer to see who can get the highest ratios of inches to torque here in the UK without stroking my engine or sacrificing reliability. Last thing I want is to be broken down near some remote Norwegian Fjord or the middle of Transylvania Though I do have Europe wide breakdown cover and recovery to my home
Neil Try hooking up with grbrown he is a member here on the forums and resides in Bedford UK I'm sure he can get you all the local info you might need to achieve your build. He does seem quite knowledgeable. Reliability on the other hand is something that you can control to an extent. what you put in is what you get out. Seems like your going to do a lot of traveling over the next year and you have covered your self quite well. One more thing for short, some say woods cams are noisy my w6 was a little but the w8 is not at all, I guess it depends on who sets it up and achieving 140 plus torque is very possible in 117" and 124" motors and the most you can get off an 80"er is I believe 97" But that requires splitting the cases and boring them plus new jugs.
Last edited by 98hotrodfatboy; Dec 20, 2014 at 06:12 AM.
Thank you, I will try and find grbrown
I dont plan on going for more CI in my bike as the 95 engine blocks dont handle bigger bores apparently. And if I put a stroker kit in I may as well get a new engine like a bigger ultima or s&s
Seems they can do everything to turn an 80" evo to a 100+ ft/lbs torque monster. I may just drive over there in the summer and get my bike done. Thanks for the tips
7 Surprising Harley-Davidson Products that Are Not Motorcycles
Slideshow: The bar-and-shield logo shows up on far more than motorcycles, some of the company's most unexpected products have nothing to do with riding.
Slideshow: From the troubled AMF years to modern misfires, these bikes earned reputations for reliability issues, questionable engineering, or disappointing performance.
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Slideshow: The Swiss custom shop has taken a Harley Softail and stretched it into something so long and low that it looks closer to a rolling sculpture than a conventional motorcycle.
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Slideshow: A standard cruiser becomes an intricate metal canvas in the hands of a Swiss custom house known for pushing Harley-Davidson platforms far beyond their factory brief.
Slideshow: Harley-Davidson's challenges aren't abstract; they show up in dropping shipments, shrinking dealer traffic, and strategic decisions that aren't yet translating into growth.
Though I do have Europe wide breakdown cover and recovery to my home
